[ncdnhc-discuss] Board Positions on .ORG - And linkage to ICANN Reform/Restructure
Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM
apisan at servidor.unam.mx
Fri Apr 5 08:29:43 CEST 2002
Dear Adam,
your comment on the "threats" thread merits very precise response.
1. Chuck Costello did not use threatening language; that was Hans Klein. I
engaged in a clear, frontal dialogue with him to that respect and have
expressed my opinion about its lamentable implications then and thereafter
as well. Chuck did choose strong language whose intention may be either to
just say what he said or to get on the headlines. It may be read as the
strong language that ocassionally comes up even in cool-minded assessments
or as a rallying cry of which we may have seen too many, or not.
Re the theatening language, I hope "kicking some ass" qualifies as
that in your dictionary which I now see is very thin-skinned.
2. I did express a strong discrepancy with the Carter Center and its
credentials. I specifically said "it is not uncontroversial" and "some
obvious cheating has passed by the Center". This knowledge comes from
many years of contact and work related to systems, training, etc. related
to elections in developing democracies. It was and is not a flat out
disqualification, BTW, but indeed a questioning.
3. A small clarification, since you've been reading the transcript. In the
excellent but necessarily not perfect transcript I am quoted
saying "That's my joke" instead of "That's my job".
Alejandro Pisanty
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5550-8405
http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
*
** 10 Aniversario de Internet Society - www.inet2002.org en Washington, DC
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Adam Peake wrote:
> >Richard dba J W,
> >
> >ah, the lovely language of threats, their perfumed smell, their delicious
> >taste.
> >
> >Replay the video of the Accra meeting where we touched on the subject of
> >threats. It's neat.
>
>
> Dear Alejandro,
>
> To be quite honest, I thought the "threat" thread was the most
> disappointing thing I'd seen from ICANN to date.
>
> Chuck Costello, "blue ribbon" volunteer participant in a study
> committee created by the board makes comments (non threatening - we
> can all go read them
> <http://www.icann.org/accra/captioning-afternoon-13mar02.htm> search
> for "Costello") on ICANN process and the "President's" reform
> proposal. He's not impressed and he says so.
>
> But Costello's not a typical ICANN nut. ALSC was the second committee
> ICANN had invited him to join, previously he'd been a volunteer
> member of the ICANN 2000 election committee as well as outside
> monitor for that election (selected by ICANN, and didn't the Carter
> Center volunteer to cover costs for the monitoring work? More fool
> them...) He'd spent the past year or so joining ALSC conference
> calls, reading BS email and travelling to ICANN meetings.
>
> One board member, Jonathan Cohen, completely misunderstood what
> Costello said (have to wonder if he was in the room when Costello
> spoke?), said he thinks Costello's comments were insulting, biased,
> self serving and inappropriate. Beauty of the transcripts is we can
> read what was said and see who was threatening who (or, in this case,
> whose knee jerked.)
>
> Another Director, you Alejandro, attacked the credibility of
> Costello's organization. I've no idea what you and Jonathan were
> thinking, but for board members to insult someone you (*you* the
> board) had more than once asked to volunteer to serve the
> organization was very wrong.
>
> If there's a lesson here it's don't volunteer for anything. Which is
> a great shame.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> >Alejandro Pisanty
> >
> >
> >. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> >Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
> >UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
> >Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> >Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5550-8405
> >http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
> >*
> >** 10 Aniversario de Internet Society - www.inet2002.org en Washington, DC
> >---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
> > Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
> >. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Jeff Williams wrote:
> >
> >> Alejandro and all,
> >>
> >> You are quite right as to Eric's interest in getting things moving
> >> quickly on the reform/restructering track. I was the one that suggested
> >> that be a separate thread. None the less as you mention these areas
> >> ( .ORG boD decision and Reform/Restructuring of ICANN ) do indeed
> >> converge on several levels. Therefore it would seem appropriate
> >> fro the time being to just change the subject line of this thread
> >> to indicate such, which I am doing in this response for purposes
> >> of clarity and understanding.
> >>
> >> As Karl pointed out as far as DNSO restructuring with respect to
> >> the BOD decision and .ORG, it would seems that in this particular area
> >> unless o until that restructuring and especially Reform of the ICANN
> >> BoD and staff has been effected, the .ORG BOD decision is in violation
> >> of the ICANN Bylaws as they stand now. Ergo, such a decision
> >> requires either a rethink and redo, or disciplinary action of the BOD
> >> members voting in favor of this .ORG decision in departure of the
> >> DNSO TF recommendation's. In the likely event that such disciplinary
> >> action against those BOD members is not taken, it would than seem
> >> wise for the BOD to seriously reconsider it's decision or perhaps
> >> face other legal action if failing to do so...
> >>
> >> Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM wrote:
> >>
> >> > Dear Karl,
> >> >
> >> > the Board resolution and the discussion which the staff is instructed to
> > > > take into account for the RFP contain and extend the DNSO recommendation,
> >> > some of the minority opinions expressed through the process within the
> >> > DNSO, and some precautions which were not even outlined then.
> >> >
> >> > One of them addresses a concern expressed in the last few hours by Adam
> > > > Peake, viz that a company interested in the business of .org set up a
> > > > "front" organization. Only a couple of the efforts of this kind have been
> >> > mentioned explicitly here. Some NCDNHC participants have been part of
> > > > efforts to set up .org steering organizations with known
> >business backing;
> >> > others have the suspicion expressed by Adam.
> >> >
> >> > As Milton has implied, a number of points in this conversation have begun
> >> > to converge. Doubtless it would be useful to concentrate an effort in the
> >> > reform process. As someone else has written that is, of course, a separate
> >> > track, and as Eric has underlined, one to move on ASAP.
> >> >
> >> > Yours,
> >> >
> >> > Alejandro Pisanty
> >> >
> >> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >>. . . .
> >> > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> >> > Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
> >> > UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
> >> > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> >> > Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5550-8405
> >> > http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
> >> > *
> >> > ** 10 Aniversario de Internet Society - www.inet2002.org en Washington, DC
> >> > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
> >> > Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
> >> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >>. . . .
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > you are getting weirder and weirder by the minute. If the
> >>Board takes up
> >> > > > input it's wrong too now?
> >> > >
> >> > > This was an instance when the DNSO actually did its job and
> >>came up with a
> >> > > thoughtful recommendation. The recommendation by the Names
> >>Council may be
> >> > > seen at: http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020205.NCdotorg-to-ICANN.html
> >> > > And the actual text of the material endorsed by the Names Council may be
> >> > > seen at: http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020117.NCdotorg-report.html
> >> > >
> >> > > ICANN's bylaws obligate the board to follow supporting organization
> >> > > recommendations unless the board finds that certain conditions exist.
> >> > >
> >> > > There was, in fact a DNSO recommendation. And the board did
> >>not find that
> >> > > that recommendation fell short of any of the requirements of Article VI
> >> > > Section 2(e). Nor were the procedures of Article VI Section 2(f)
> >> > > followed.
> >> > >
> >> > > I consider myself to have erred by not recognizing this (particularly as
> >> > > this same question was the topic of my request for reconsideration of
> >> > > November 17, 1999 -
> >> > >
> >>http://www.icann.org/committees/reconsideration/auerbach-request-17nov99.htm
> >> > > - and is (was?) pending before the Independent Review panel).
> >> > >
> >> > > Why the resolution was drafted in the way it was - referencing, but not
> >> > > adopting, the DNSO recommendation, and instead substituting a weaker
> >> > > formulation and allowing staff discretion over matters already
> >>decided by
> >> > > the DNSO - is a mystery. But given that the draft resolution appeared
> >> > > less than six hours before the start of the board meeting there was no
> >> > > time to make more than the most cursory of inquiries.
> >> > >
> >> > > --karl--
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > ARTICLE VI: SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS ...
> >> > >
> >> > > Section 2. RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS ...
> >> > >
> >> > > (e) Subject to the provisions of Article III, Section 3, the Board shall
> >> > > accept the recommendations of a Supporting Organization if the
> >>Board finds
> >> > > that the recommended policy (1) furthers the purposes of, and is in the
> >> > > best interest of, the Corporation; (2) is consistent with the
> >>Articles and
> >> > > Bylaws; (3) was arrived at through fair and open processes (including
> >> > > participation by representatives of other Supporting Organizations if
> >> > > requested); and (4) is not reasonably opposed by any other Supporting
> > > > > Organization. ...
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > (f) If the Board declines to accept any recommendation of a Supporting
> >> > > Organization, it shall return the recommendation to the Supporting
> >> > > Organization for further consideration, along with a statement of the
> > > > > reasons it declines to accept the recommendation. If, after reasonable
> > > > > efforts, the Board does not receive a recommendation from the
> >Supporting
> >> > > Organization that it finds meets the standards of Section 2(e) of this
> > > > > Article VI or, after attempting to mediate any disputes or
> >disagreements
> >> > > between Supporting Organizations, receives conflicting recommendations
> >> > > from Supporting Organizations, and the Board finds there is a
> >> > > justification for prompt action, the Board may initiate, amend or modify
> >> > > and then approve a specific policy recommendation.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > Discuss mailing list
> >> > > Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> >> > > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > > >
>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list